Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2184

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#109 » Nov 29 2017 06:15

Orion7 wrote:I mean, if we're taking GW staff as gospel regarding the squatting of tau then we have a paradox as my local store staff said our codex is coming out in march.

Great business plan, squat them then release a codex ;)

And that's the issue with rumors

Don't even think about it as a rumor. Tau aren't going anywhere.

CelticBarbarian
Shas'Saal
Posts: 60

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#110 » Nov 29 2017 09:10

The whole increasing the points cost of Titans and similar units seems a bit counterproductive when one of the big appeals of Chapter Approved is rules for Apocalypse games IMO. Especially since the use of them made the games go significantly faster.

User avatar
Beerson
Shas'Saal
Posts: 106

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#111 » Nov 29 2017 09:53

CelticBarbarian wrote:The whole increasing the points cost of Titans and similar units seems a bit counterproductive when one of the big appeals of Chapter Approved is rules for Apocalypse games IMO. Especially since the use of them made the games go significantly faster.


Apocalypse missions don't use points so there is nothing counterproductive about it, the increase of points makes sure we don't use titanic units in matched games but rather leave em for narrative games

CelticBarbarian
Shas'Saal
Posts: 60

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#112 » Nov 29 2017 11:07

Beerson wrote:
CelticBarbarian wrote:The whole increasing the points cost of Titans and similar units seems a bit counterproductive when one of the big appeals of Chapter Approved is rules for Apocalypse games IMO. Especially since the use of them made the games go significantly faster.


Apocalypse missions don't use points so there is nothing counterproductive about it, the increase of points makes sure we don't use titanic units in matched games but rather leave em for narrative games


Oh really? I didn't know it doesn't use points. That's... a little better I guess. It's still a little irksome, but I can live with that.

User avatar
Emberkahn
Shas'Saal
Posts: 114

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#113 » Nov 29 2017 09:38

pilky wrote:
Grogalmighty wrote:Perhaps we are coming at this from different perspectives. I can see two.

First, I like my army to win now and then. I don't get fun from being curbstomped. It makes me feel bad for the work I put into painting them and the time I put into making them look great. I want to have a chance. We don't have one now. In fact, we are being kicked out.

Second....I told you this is what I heard.


And I heard that Tau are going to get a Codex soon with 5pt crisis suits and 10pt riptides. And I'd wager what I’ve heard is significantly more likely that what you've heard. ;)

Also, I don’t know what lists you're playing but I've managed to table, or nearly table, death guard, grey knights, dark angels, and nids. Also scored convincing wins vs nids (post codex) and marines. Only time I’ve been curbstomped as Tau was facing up against a World Eaters list in the final round of a tournament. And out of the dozen or so games I've played, the only game I've taken more than one Commander in was the game I played tonight (and lost funnily enough). We have plenty of issues but we're no where near the levels of awful we had in 5th edition


Likewise; if you play Tau in the most competitive way possible, we are very strong. Our biggest problem is that whilst imperium factions have well over 100 competitively viable units, we have less than 10.

The problem that we face at the moment isn't competitiveness, its variety. I want to be able to go to competitive tournaments to play competitively without fusion-commanders, drones, and y'vahra.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 416

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#114 » Dec 01 2017 03:04

I'm expecting a fast FAQ on this one, but, here's the new character rule.
http://i.4cdn.org/tg/1512114809065.jpg
There's one intended difference, and differences I believe are unintended.
First up, the intended change is simply clarification, as seen in recent FAQs and commentary:
Characters must be the closest target, no ifs, ands, or buts. If another unit is hiding behind a wall, but is closer, you still can't target the character. This was intended to prevent "Rhino sniping," where a player uses large, blocky vehicles to obscure other units, so that the, "nearest visible" target was a character.

The first unintended difference, is the change from "Wounds Characteristic" to simple "Wounds." A person could easily exploit this to argue that a when a large character model is reduced to 9 wounds, they become immune to targeting.

The second unintended change is the loss of the "shooting phase" restriction, which means characters are no untargetable during overwatch, even if they charge first, should another unit be closer when the character declares the charge. For T'au, this also affects our cooperative overwatches.

Again, I believe that these two "side effects," will be errata'd quickly, but it is up to you, the individual player, to determine whether these changes are valid in your games.

User avatar
Lostroninsoul
Shas'Saal
Posts: 225

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#115 » Dec 01 2017 05:33

SinisterSamurai wrote:I'm expecting a fast FAQ on this one, but, here's the new character rule.
http://i.4cdn.org/tg/1512114809065.jpg
There's one intended difference, and differences I believe are unintended.
First up, the intended change is simply clarification, as seen in recent FAQs and commentary:
Characters must be the closest target, no ifs, ands, or buts. If another unit is hiding behind a wall, but is closer, you still can't target the character. This was intended to prevent "Rhino sniping," where a player uses large, blocky vehicles to obscure other units, so that the, "nearest visible" target was a character.

The first unintended difference, is the change from "Wounds Characteristic" to simple "Wounds." A person could easily exploit this to argue that a when a large character model is reduced to 9 wounds, they become immune to targeting.

The second unintended change is the loss of the "shooting phase" restriction, which means characters are no untargetable during overwatch, even if they charge first, should another unit be closer when the character declares the charge. For T'au, this also affects our cooperative overwatches.

Again, I believe that these two "side effects," will be errata'd quickly, but it is up to you, the individual player, to determine whether these changes are valid in your games.

Based on the picture your interpretation 'appears' correct. However, it is a tiny snipet of the page it is on. It is entirely possibly that it is being taking out of context. It maybe in a section labeled "shooting phase rules" ect. So we will have to wait and see what the full page says. I have a hunch it is on a shooting phase rule page, tbh.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 368
Contact:

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#116 » Dec 01 2017 07:01

SinisterSamurai wrote:The second unintended change is the loss of the "shooting phase" restriction, which means characters are no untargetable during overwatch, even if they charge first, should another unit be closer when the character declares the charge. For T'au, this also affects our cooperative overwatches.


I don't think it will apply to overwatch because you don't select a target, you are reacting to a charge.

Though I would agree you now can't target characters with psychic powers unless they are closest unit.

Though the 9 wounds bit I would say is 9 wounds on profile still, a hive tyrant doesn't become invisible because I shot it :D

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 416

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#117 » Dec 01 2017 07:38

Lostroninsoul wrote: Based on the picture your interpretation 'appears' correct. However, it is a tiny snipet of the page it is on. It is entirely possibly that it is being taking out of context. It maybe in a section labeled "shooting phase rules" ect. So we will have to wait and see what the full page says. I have a hunch it is on a shooting phase rule page, tbh.

Fair enough, but I've seen the page itself, and there's not really any additional context. This is from a section of matched play rules updates. This section does not rehash the core rules with a "shooting section," as it were. The part above talks about how and why rules are changing. The next part below discusses one of the other "new" match play rules, like boots on the ground or limits of command.

I totally understand giving it the benefit of the doubt, though. That preface might have something.
Nymphomanius wrote:I don't think it will apply to overwatch because you don't select a target, you are reacting to a charge.

Though I would agree you now can't target characters with psychic powers unless they are closest unit.

Though the 9 wounds bit I would say is 9 wounds on profile still, a hive tyrant doesn't become invisible because I shot it :D

Most persons I've debated this with argue that overwatch uses all of the rules for shooting, and psychic powers don't "target." I'm not telling you how to interpret the rule, but rather advising players of an issue they may have to discuss with an opponent who interprets them that way.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 368
Contact:

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#118 » Dec 01 2017 08:56

SinisterSamurai wrote:Most persons I've debated this with argue that overwatch uses all of the rules for shooting, and psychic powers don't "target." I'm not telling you how to interpret the rule, but rather advising players of an issue they may have to discuss with an opponent who interprets them that way.


What about psychic powers that select a target unit? How is that not targeting?

Also if an overwatch uses all the rules for a shooting attack including target selection when being charged can I overwatch against any unit I can see that's in range even if it's not the one declaring the charge?

User avatar
Beerson
Shas'Saal
Posts: 106

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#119 » Dec 01 2017 03:04

I think it's pretty obvious that this rule doesn't apply on overwatch, as you are not selecting target, you are shooting on the unit that charges, and anyone trying to tell you otherwise is probably "that guy"

Personally I thing this new rule is outright wrong, not just illogical.
If they were trying to stop cheesing by blocking LoS to shoot at characters, introducing new, even worse cheese is not the solution.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 416

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#120 » Dec 02 2017 12:11

Again, yes. I believe that the intent is clear, when held against the old rule and FAQs. I believe that this will be FAQed.

CelticBarbarian
Shas'Saal
Posts: 60

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#121 » Dec 05 2017 12:18

Grogalmighty wrote:Hey bro I am just saying how it is.

Also, don't use forgeworld as a barometer, what they make is entirely up to the director of that studio and he is the only Tau fan at GW.

"Only Tau fan at GW", aren't you forgetting about Phil Kelly? You know, the guy who basically defined the Farsight Enclaves lore and conformed Shas'O'Kais' canon status?

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 864

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#122 » Dec 06 2017 04:18

They did an FAQ that said that characters can be shot in overwatch even if they are not the closest model at the moment of their charge.

The character changes in CA do not change this fact.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

CelticBarbarian
Shas'Saal
Posts: 60

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#123 » Dec 07 2017 03:40

AnonAmbientLight wrote:They did an FAQ that said that characters can be shot in overwatch even if they are not the closest model at the moment of their charge.

The character changes in CA do not change this fact.


Yeah... though most people I play tend to try sending in at least one squad of mooks to tie them up in melee before the character gets in.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 864

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#124 » Dec 07 2017 03:44

That's fine. That's what you're supposed to do.

But if there was a squad of space marines in front and a chapter master charged your line from behind those space marines, you get to fire overwatch on the chapter master.

That doesn't change with the CA ruling. The CA ruling was to fix "clever use of game mechanics" from being taken advantage of.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

PeeJ
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 99

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#125 » Dec 07 2017 09:57

AnonAmbientLight wrote:That doesn't change with the CA ruling. The CA ruling was to fix "clever use of game mechanics" from being taken advantage of.


It was implemented because some people were parking tanks (Rhinos specifically) in such a way to block LOS to units closer than the characters so they could shoot at them IIRC?

It's good to know that the CA rule doesn't change the FAQ, but i'm sure there will be some out there that try to claim that it does, because people.

User avatar
StealthKnightSteg
Shas'Saal
Posts: 195
Contact:

Re: Chapter Approved Leaks Discussion

Post#126 » Dec 08 2017 03:53

What I missed in the CA book was a point to confine the HQ spam a little...
I was really hoping on an extra rule for the Supreme Command Detachment. Something like that you can only employ this detachment if you have 3 of the following detachments in any combination already in your army (Patrol, Battalion, Brigade, Vanguard, Spearhead and Outrider)
That way it would be a more thematic solution.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Blinx, DancinHobo and 4 guests